Citation Nr: 21027915 Decision Date: 05/07/21 Archive Date: 05/07/21 DOCKET NO. 17-62 334A DATE: May 7, 2021 ORDER Service connection for right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is granted. Service connection for left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is granted. Service connection for coronary artery disease is granted. Service connection for type II diabetes mellitus is granted. VETERAN'S CONTENTIONS The Veteran contends that the scope of his duties as a Navigator required him to spend time on the ground in the Republic of Vietnam, such that he is entitled to service connection for coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, and left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy on a presumptive basis. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran had boots on the ground in the Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) during service, and as a result is presumed to have been exposed to herbicide agents. 2. The Veteran has current diagnoses of coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, and left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1116, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). 2. The criteria for service connection for left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1116, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). 3. The criteria for service connection for coronary artery disease are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1116, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). 4. The criteria for service connection for type II diabetes mellitus are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1116, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from April 1970 to August 1976. These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) via videoconference in March 2021. The transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. 1. Entitlement to service connection for right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy 2. Entitlement to service connection for left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy 3. Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease 4. Entitlement to service connection for type II diabetes mellitus Generally, service connection may be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred or aggravated in active military service. This means that the facts establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces, or if preexisting such service, was aggravated therein. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). Establishing service connection generally requires medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 506 (1995), aff'd per curiam, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (table). In addition, a veteran who, during active service, served in Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, shall be presumed to have been exposed during such service to an herbicide agent, including Agent Orange, unless there is affirmative evidence to establish that the veteran was not exposed to any such agent during that service. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii). If a veteran is presumed to have been exposed to an herbicide during such active service, the veteran shall be service connected for the diseases listed under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e), which includes ischemic heart disease, Type II diabetes mellitus, and early onset peripheral neuropathy, if the disability manifested to a degree of 10 percent or more at any time after service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(ii). Determinations as to service connection will be based on review of the entire evidence of record, to include all pertinent medical evidence. VA must also consider all favorable lay evidence of record. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); see also Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469-70 (1994) (a Veteran is competent to report on that of which he or she has actually observed and is within the realm of his or her personal knowledge). Here, current diagnoses of coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, and left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are confirmed by the evidence of record. See October 2020 Ascension Medical Group Records. See also June 2009 Neurodiagnostic Study. The Veteran was diagnosed with peripheral neuropathy prior to the period on appeal, but he has consistently stated that he continues to experience peripheral neuropathy. See Layno, 6 Vet. App. at 469-70. Thus, the dispositive issue is whether the Veteran set foot in Vietnam, which would entitle him to the presumption of exposure to herbicide agents, including Agent Orange, and an award of service connection for coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, and left lower extremity peripheral on a presumptive basis. In this regard, the Veteran testified during the March 2021 Board hearing that he flew missions in support of combat over and near Vietnam. He further testified that he set foot on the ground in Vietnam when he landed the plane and got out to go into the operations area. The Board acknowledges the JSRRC's negative response and correspondence from an Archivist for the Air Force Historical Research Agency stating that the KC-135 aircraft were not authorized to land in Vietnam unless there was an immediate danger to life or the aircraft requiring such a drastic action. However, the Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report the geographical locations of his assignment and the Board finds the Veteran's reports that he set foot on the ground in Vietnam credible, as the Veteran's statements are consistent with the nature and circumstances of his service. See Layno, 6 Vet. App. at 469-70; Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The Veteran's military personnel records confirm that the Veteran was a Navigator in the Air Force, and that he flew critical combat missions in the Southeast Asia Theater. Buddy statements also confirm that the Veteran accomplished flight duties as Navigator which required him to fly into Vietnam. Specifically, buddy statements confirm that the KC135A made Flash priority flights to deliver SR-1 reconnaissance films from Kadena to Tan Son Nhut Air Base Vietnam in 1972. While there are no service department records on file that expressly confirm that the Veteran set foot on the ground in Vietnam, when considering the totality of circumstances surrounding the nature of the Veteran's service and resolving all doubt in his favor, the Board finds that it is as likely as not that the Veteran set foot on land in Vietnam in the course of his service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Thus, the Veteran's herbicide exposure is presumed. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii). In sum, in light of the Veteran's current diagnoses of coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, and left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy and his presumed exposure to herbicides during service, the Board finds that service connection for coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, and left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is warranted. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e); see also 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6). S.C. Krembs Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Smith-Jennings, Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.